The "They" came in the same paragraph as British Establishment, so I would have thought it was obvious which "they" I was referring to.  And if I am not allowed to attempt to articulate or understand views I don't agree with, I have no further interest in being here.  I have no interest in being part of a chorus line parroting the perceived wisdom here.

Jerome has written a good story articulating the case for the status quo post Lisbon and the Council appointments.  I think it is possible to argue a coherent contrary case - that the competence of the appointees is not proven, that it is an attempt to appease British Euroscepticism and will fail, and ultimately, that the EU might have been better served by appointees with greater electoral standing, proven track records of articulating EU interests, developing new EU policies or mandates, and influencing their adoption on a global scale.

The jury is out, I don't know which view will ultimately turn out to be right, and I am open to persuasion, but I am interested in participating here only if I am allowed to articulate views which are not necessarily mine or which I am not sure about.

notes from no w here